What’s with evidence?

It looks like the value of evidence and what evidence means has become obscured now that the fools (atheists) have taken over science.

The fools (atheists) have tried to trick people into believing such lies as:
– “Lack of evidence indicates that a claim is false”
– “Absence of evidence is evidence of absence”
– “Assuming that things are false until proven true is valid”
– “You can’t prove a negative”
– “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence”

Now to debunk these claims:

Claim: “Lack of evidence indicates that a claim is false”
Correct Claim: “Contradictory evidence indicates that a claim is false”

Claim: “Absence of evidence is evidence of absence”
Correct Claim: “Contradictory evidence is evidence of absence”

Claim: “Assuming that things are false until proven true is valid”
Correct Claim: “Assuming that things are false because of contradictory evidence is valid”

In order to falsify these statements we can just point out counterexamples:
– Everything proven to exist or be true in modern science now lacked evidence in the past
– Unproven mathematical theorems of the past

If a mere lack of evidence indicates that a claim is false then we should expect everything in modern science to be false since everything in modern science lacked evidence during the time-period that it lacked empirical testability.

There was no shred of evidence for everything in modern science now from the heliocentric theory, atoms, quarks, black holes, electromagnetism, General Relativity, Newtonian gravity, and so on during the time-period that these things lacked empirical testability.

So this completely falsifies the reasoning that a “lack of evidence” indicates that a claim is false.

Many theories and hypotheses have been falsified in science with contradictory evidence, not a mere ‘lack of evidence’.

So what’s contradictory evidence? It’s just evidence that contradicts a claim.

Contradictory evidence can only exist if a hypothesis is empirically testable, so evidence is only relevant if a hypothesis is empirically testable.

In mathematics and logic it’s easy to prove a negative, just use a proof by contradiction or counterexamples. There are lots of negative proofs that exist.

Here’s an example, a negative statement: “There is no such thing as the greatest odd integer” can easily be proven by using a proof by contradiction.

You can prove a negative by falsifying a positive, like if someone claims “Every odd integer is prime” then using a counterexample like the integer 9 you would prove the statement “Not every odd integer is prime” true.

In science it’s easy to prove a negative or positive statement as long as it’s an empirically testable statement, just use a proof by contradiction, counterexamples, or rephrase the negative statement into a positive statement.

Here’s an example:
– To prove that acupuncture does not work use a proof by contradiction (assume the hypothesis that “acupuncture does work” then arrive at contradictory data for that hypothesis)
– To prove that acupuncture does not work rephrase the negative statement into a positive statement then prove it (prove that “acupuncture is indistinguishable from a placebo effect” or that “acupuncture is useless in treating anything”)

So we can easily see that you can prove negative mathematically and scientifically (as long as the hypothesis is empirically testable).

Of course it’s important to remember that it’s impossible to prove or disprove any empirically untestable claim.

This statement is very common in the media and elsewhere, but it’s merely an argument from personal incredulity.

Basically what this statement is saying is if a claim pushes your incredulity you would somehow need different standards of evidence to believe. But history and science tells us that using your incredulity to determine whether or not a hypothesis is true or false is an invalid methodology that would give highly inaccurate data. Basically everything in modern science might push anyone’s incredulity!

In science things require the same standards of evidence and proof regardless of how much they might or might not push someone’s subjective incredulity.

Requiring different standards of evidence because of incredulity is invalid because incredulity is something subjective (and not objectively measurable) and what tells us what reality is like isn’t incredulity but empirical observation.

Reality behaves the way it does regardless of human incredulity.

If anyone disagrees with anything I’ve said feel free to criticize, scrutinize, or question me. Unlike the fools (atheists) who strongly strongly discourage criticism and scrutiny of any claim they personally agree with by subjectively interpreting any type of criticism as “trolling” I encourage and invite criticism, this is because if a statement really is true then it would stand up to any amount of criticism. So the more people criticize, scrutinize, and question things the closer we come towards the truth.

In Conclusion:
– A mere lack of evidence by itself tells us nothing about if a hypothesis is true or false
– Contradictory evidence indicates that a claim is false
– Supporting evidence indicates that a claim is true
– Supporting and contradictory evidence can only exist if a hypothesis is empirically testable
– Evidence can only be relevant if a hypothesis is empirically testable

“atheists ruin everything they touch” just touched a box… didn’t ruin it!
“atheists are the lowest form of life” Biological proof? No?
“atheists should stop doing science” Lol this one is the funniest. Modern lightbulb, radium, polonium, microsoft.
“100% of atheists are racist” Just because some atheists that you know or heard of are racist doesn’t mean all atheists are racist. You conclude things way to fast, bigot.

It’s no secret anymore tht atheists conducted scientific experiments that inspired the nazis to prove that whites are dominating the evolutionary scale. Some experiments even included bestiality.

“atheists ruin everything they touch” just touched a box… didn’t ruin it!
“atheists are the lowest form of life” Biological proof? No?
“atheists should stop doing science” Lol this one is the funniest. Modern lightbulb, radium, polonium, microsoft.
“100% of atheists are racist” Just because some atheists that you know or heard of are racist doesn’t mean all atheists are racist. You conclude things way to fast, bigot.

When I said that atheists ruin everything they touch I didn’t mean in that sense you idiot.

When I said that atheists were the lowest form of life I didn’t mean in a biological sense.

I’ve already explained the dangers atheists pose to science in my other articles. After atheists took over science in the late 1960s and early 1970s we immediately stopped finding cures, the life expectancy started growing slower, physics became stuck with empirically untestable hypotheses, technology started growing slower, and science is heading towards pseudoscience.

Estonia the most atheistic country in the world has 0 Nobel prizes in science.

In general atheists hate science and technology and just want to live in the stone age. They think that technology is artificial and unnatural and just believe in living in grass.

People have to realize the real dangers the atheist population poses to science, they’re trying to turn science into a popularity contest about authority and incredulity alone instead of valuing empirical observations and valid reasoning.

The very very very few scientific contributions atheists ever made just came by luck and chance and are things that anyone would have discovered or figured out.

The historical consensus is that religion directly caused the scientific revolution and Maxwell’s Equations, the junk in the atheist-controlled media has been thoroughly debunked by historians.

I’ve also already proven how the atheist population directly causes racism and nationalism to thrive on and on, and every atheist that responded just reconfirmed what I said.

I’m just warning people about what WILL happen once the atheist population goes up.

Atheists are weak, useless, and deserve to be viewed as subhuman beings.

“atheists ruin everything they touch” just touched a box… didn’t ruin it!
“atheists are the lowest form of life” Biological proof? No?
“atheists should stop doing science” Lol this one is the funniest. Modern lightbulb, radium, polonium, microsoft.
“100% of atheists are racist” Just because some atheists that you know or heard of are racist doesn’t mean all atheists are racist. You conclude things way to fast, bigot.

Except that I didn’t use any of those statements as arguments here…did you read the OP post?

Foolish (atheistic).

The only things remotely similar to arguments that I made are “atheists should stop doing science” (I explained this in high details in my other posts) and also “100% of atheists are racist” which is a straw man, more like “100% of atheist countries are racist” (which I also explained in high details in my other articles).

My god, if you hate atheists this much you must MURDER homosexuals. And If I were to say something sexist you would startsaying atheists are sexist. This comment is probably gonna give you the idea to say atheists are sexist.
And why only atheists? Why not all racist people hm?

I find it ironic that the fools (atheists) keep disproving themselves in the statements they make…lol

So far the responses from the fools (atheists) are mere personal attacks and false accusations.

How can the fools (atheists) falsely accuse me of not having things open to all or being close-minded even though this blog site is open to anyone and anyone can post any comment they want without worrying about the comment needing approval, or being banned or anything like that, lol?

The ones who don’t allow free and open criticism of their claims are the atheists, this is proven by visiting any atheist forum or blog site.

Is there a such thing as even ONE atheist forum or blog site that has no regulations on comments like how I do and allows people to question, criticize, scrutinize, or question the claims they make?

I don’t think so, if there is any atheist can prove me wrong by posting one.

The fools (atheists) are staunch anti-science fanatics, close-minded, and don’t allow free and open criticism.

I remember a while ago I was on an atheist forum called Internet Infidels or something like that. I destroyed all the atheists in every single argument and the moderators in response just got angry and banned me….when asked about it they just said they don’t need to have any reason to ban people lol…clearly showing their close-minded staunch anti-science fanatic attitude.

We know with 100% certainty that atheists are anti-science fanatics because criticism and scrutiny is one of the main principles in science and basically every single atheist that exists is unequivocally opposed to the concept of criticism and scrutiny.

Well if you know you’re wrong like the fools (atheists) do then of course you would have an issue with people questioning, criticizing, and scrutinizing your beliefs.

Since I know that I’m right I allow criticism and scrutiny of anything I say.

I totally agree with you. I posted very polite comments on some atheist sites but all my comments were deleted after the atheist participants insulted me ; finally the moderators banned me. One of the worst is probably Austin Cline.

Don’t you fools (atheists) get tired of throwing personal attacks in desperation?

Like I said , throwing personal attacks at me doesn’t refute any statement that I made, fools (atheists).

It’s always a great laugh to see an atheist in desperation!

👽👽👽 / Aug 4 2014 8:36 pm

During centuries , most scientists believed that life could not exist in the depth of the oceans because of the lack of light , but they were all wrong. Scientists made a lot of mistake such as not believing in the existence of rogue waves or giant squids.
But atheist scientists are the worst because they only believe what they see. Until they see an extra-terrestrial they will deny that extraterrestrial life is possible in some goldilocks zones.

Really ?
Of course atheists don’t know the meaning of “extra-terrestrial”. They only know pornstars.
Extra-terrestrial life not only means Martians but all creatures not born on Earth : like angels , God etc…
😜
Bye retard !

Extra terrestrial mean beyond the boundaries of Earth. Is that enough for you, dumbfuck?

👽👽👽 / Nov 23 2014 10:10 pm

Pixelguy , are u an expert in idiocy like most atheists ?
Read this :

The new president of the Vatican Observatory Foundation has said that it is only a matter of time before alien life forms are discovered, which will pave the way to questions about God’s relationship to intelligent beings outside our planet.

Jesuit Brother Guy Consolmagno speculated that the general public will not be too surprised when life on other planets is eventually discovered, and will react in much the same way it did when news broke in the ’90s that there are other planets orbiting far off stars.

I disagree with your calling atheists fools. Dismissive and insulting language is no way to encourage conversation. If you actually want to have a discussion, which is suggested by your inviting people to question you, then you should try making your forum open to all. Disagreeing with your conclusion doesn’t make us fools, and just because we come to different conclusions than you doesn’t make us less open to discussion.

iamnobody has a very closed mind. his convinced his right even thought he has absolutely nothing go on. he will use anything he can too try to make his point valid even if it means twisting yours around. his basically a waste of space and fortunately even most religious people are against him.

You can’t be this delusional, which world are you living in? Atheists don’t permit everything, they don’t allow free and open criticism like how I do, so what do you mean?

What the fools (atheists) do since they are staunch anti-science fanatics is subjectively interpret any type of criticism that they disagree with as trolling or something like that or ban and block anyone who criticizes them…this is because if a statement really is true it will stand up to any amount of criticism, since the fools (atheists) know that they are wrong they have to prevent and stop any type of criticism.

Any atheist can prove me wrong by pointing me to any blog site or forum that allows free and open criticism like how mine’s does.

lol….just more personal attacks without refutations…why don’t you fools (atheists) try to refute a statement I made rather than just ranting about how things aren’t open to all even though this blog site is open to all…better yet why don’t one of you fools (atheists) start a forum or blog site that allows people to freely question, criticize, and scrutinize anything atheists say like how I do?

On my blog site people can question, scrutinize, and criticize anything I say as much as they want..but instead of doing that the fools (atheists) usually get upset and start throwing personal attacks…lol

Comments like these just show the low near subhuman level of intelligence the fools (atheists) have.

This blog site IS OPEN TO EVERYONE, so what do you mean?

Anyone is allowed to post anything and no one gets banned or anything like that.

The ones who don’t have things open to everyone are the atheists, who don’t allow criticism, scrutiny, and questioning of any claim they agree with by subjectively interpreting any type of criticism as trolling.

If you go on almost any atheist-controlled forum that’s what they’ll do, they’ll say that if you criticize anything they personally agree with it’s trolling and you should be banned, lol.

Thanks for laugh, I think you fools (atheists) should try refuting a statement I made rather than just using personal attacks.

It’s strange to have any certainty (one way or the other) on the existence of God. Which is why I find it interesting that “itsnobody” is targeting atheists, specifically.

Wouldn’t you agree that religious folk are just as certain in the existence of their God(s) as atheists are if its non-existence? Two sides of the same coin; which leads me to the kicker: Did an atheist touch you in a naughty place?

Solara / Sep 29 2014 6:32 am

@ pixeltroll

“atheists ruin everything they touch” just touched a box… didn’t ruin it!
“atheists are the lowest form of life” Biological proof? No?
“atheists should stop doing science” Lol this one is the funniest. Modern lightbulb, radium, polonium, microsoft.
“100% of atheists are racist” Just because some atheists that you know or heard of are racist doesn’t mean all atheists are racist. You conclude things way to fast, bigot.

It’s no secret anymore tht atheists conducted scientific experiments that inspired the nazis to prove that whites are dominating the evolutionary scale. Some experiments even included bestiality.

Humans were divided when Pangea seperated. The climates were different so we adapted. Humans that existed that long ago weren’t nearly the same as what we are now. We evolved seperately. Africans have short hair because most heat comes out of your head so their body temperature stay what it should. Europeans lived in a temperate climate so the only thing that really evolved was intelligence.
Skerew racism,
skerew Solara.